Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 4713508" data-attributes="member: 8835">As a GM, I generally hide instance data  that the PC wouldn't know. Instance data is the data pertaining to a specific instance/situation.  The # of HP remaining on the 1st orc, for example.  The DC of the lock on the jail cell the party is stuck in.  As opposed to meta-data, data that is static and defines the game.  The MM stats on orcs, and DMG description of Holy Avenger swords would be examples of Meta-Data.Instance Data Examples:monster AC, unless they've been fighting the same thing long enough, where it saves time if the knowDC for most things, unless the PC would know how hard it is to attemptroll results where PC wouldn't know of failure (stealth, diplomacy, etc)attributes of gear on NPCs/monstersmonster stats and abilities (aside from AC, for combat speed reasons)I don't think instance data is what this discussion is about.  Instance data is what's on the DM's notes, and adventure documents.  Meta-data is what's in the DMG and MM.The observation is that 1E hid a lot more meta-data and rules from the players than later editions.  It seems pretty obvious this is true.  However, as players play the game, they figure out all of that meta-data.  So after a time, these secrets are meaningless.To that end, what's the real point of having the secret meta-data?  I suspect there's a middle ground.  I'd like it if players didn't have all the MM memorized.  And if the items in the DMG were surprises when they found them.  Beyond that, not much else is sacred in those books.</blockquote>

Verification